[jdm61]

Originally posted by randywebb
Many if not most of the posts above are people spewing based on this incident and don't really relate to this particular incident much.

1. The author of the article, John Draneas, was President of the Oregon PCA club and is still a big impetus in it. He is also an attorney I think. He did a good job on the article. Read it.

2. The lawyer suing owns Porsches and DEs or races them.

3. No one knows what the widow plans to do with any proceeds or what her motivation is. She may well just want to make the racing/DE events safer.

4. In law suits of this type (torts) the common approach is exactly the same as that of the 82nd Airborne -- "Sue (or kill) them all and let the Judge (or God) sort it out"

5. Remember this is just a filing of a suit, not a decision. There are lots of events, and time before any decision is made. Most of these things settle long before much happens in the litigation.

6. "inquest" - this is something the government does in a criminal case. it won't happen here. The govt. will leave it to the civil justice system.

7. The only way the widow, etc. can find out all the facts is by filing a suit. Private parties or companies can't just order docuemnts or question people - only a criminal prosecutor (or the rare agency like the SEC or EPA can do that an only under certain conditons). So if she wants to get to the bottom of the her husband's death, this is the only way.

8. This does not apply to this specific event since the dead person was rich, but the laws in the US are made for most people so the laws operate for the rich also. That is, that the only way in the US for most people to get medical care paid or in some cases even get money for a funeral is to file a lawsuit for wrongful death or negligence. These are rarely filed unless there is an insurance co. on the other end. The ins. co. will not pay usually unless there is a suit against them - simpel economics. Other countries in the devloped world have universal helath care and other means to take care of people who are injured. The US does not.

Some of you should be ashamed for what you've said about a bereaved widow.

The reason that suits are rarely filed unless there is an insurance company at the other end is that juries, even though it is impermissable for the attornies to infer that the insurance company will be on the hook and not the defendant, know there is insurance and will find against an insurer and for the plaintiff even if the facts do not indicate that they should. The old "somebody got hurt and somebody has to pay, so why not this rich insurance company" theory. In a case like this, a jury would, more likely than not, award substantial damages, not necesarily because anyone was legally negligent, but because they feel sorry for the widow. Any attorney that says otherwise is a recent law school grad with no experience, delusional or a liar.....lol The jury system works quite well in routine criminal matters because the defendant is at an inherent disadvantage anyway. In florida, the win/loss rate for defendants who go to trial is around 50/50. But in complex civil matters, letting 6-12 people who aren't smart enough to get out of jury duty decide a case is a bad idea.